Observations with an FX-8350

[Abwx]

That 290W...is that for the entire PC, or just the cpu?

Victim of viral marketing ?...

 

[Idontcare]

What do you think of OCCP and AMD Overdrive as stability tests?

Haven't tried them yet. I generally avoid stress testers that are not cpu agnostic, I want to be able to harmonize my testing regiment across cpu's and platforms. The only reason I migrated from prime95 to LinX was because at the time LinX, despite being based on the Intel Burn Test application, was considered to be really good at also pushing AMD chips to their limits as well.

But I will test the AMD Overdrive utility just to see how it compares to Prime95, why not?

OCCP is an excellent CPU stress test tool.

As for OCCP, I am assuming you mean OCCT? I do use that for GPU OC'ing because it does do error checking, something I feel is a necessary element of stress testing. In the past I have found it to be less rigorous compared to LinX, but if I have learned anything in this journey with my FX8350 it is that conclusions based on aged results are ripe for being over-turned when revisiting the problem and generating newer results.

So I will give OCCT a shot as well. No harm in that

what about using less memory on linx?

I don't quite understand what using less memory in LinX would accomplish? Using less memory is known to result in lower peak temperatures, lower GFlops, and lower power consumption. Generally we want to use the maximum amount of ram possible such that we push temperatures and power consumption as high as possible.

Victim of viral marketing ?...

I need you to stop doing this. Seriously. Not every person who comes into these forums has an agenda.

Some of us are truly ignorant of the truth and it is because of our desire to eliminate that ignorance and learn the truth that we ask questions of our colleagues on these forums.

I thought this poster's question was a perfectly reasonable question given that I am the one who posted the power number but failed to communicate the proper context of the number. The failure to communicate lies with me, not with the poster who asked me to clarify the context of the number.

That poster doesn't need you impugning the integrity of their character by your posting the implication that they are a moron who has been easily duped by "viral marketing". That kind of attitude, your attitude, is poisonous and infectious. It turns enthusiast against enthusiast and creates an environment of fear where people who have genuine questions will opt to not post and ask them out of fear of being denigrated or castigated by the likes of posts such as yours.

Please stop assuming the worst in everyone, not all of us here are logging in to press an agenda, nor are we all the pawns of some overarching conspiracy to brainwash the masses...some of us are here because we want to better ourselves by learning more about the technology that surrounds us, plain and simple human curiosity.

 

[sequoia464]

What do you think of OCCP and AMD Overdrive as stability tests?

I mostly gave up trying to follow an extremely long thread at overclock.net and don't know if you might have seen it (vishera owners thread, 760+ pages), but there were discusions as to weather Prime95 is worth using on piledriver CPU's. Have you read anything on this?

I don't really remember now what the arguements were, both for and against Prime with PD, or if there was any eventual concensus on it's validity as a tool with PD.

I have just been using LinX and AMD's stabiity tester - if these are not rigorous enough it might be time to start using Prime again??

 

[Idontcare]

I mostly gave up trying to follow an extremely long thread at overclock.net and don't know if you might have seen it (vishera owners thread, 760+ pages), but there were discusions as to weather Prime95 is worth using on piledriver CPU's. Have you read anything on this?

I don't really remember now what the arguements were, both for and against Prime with PD, or if there was any eventual concensus on it's validity as a tool with PD.

I have just been using LinX and AMD's stabiity tester - if these are not rigorous enough it might be time to start using Prime again??

As is the case with all these stress testers, results based on yesterday's version of the software are rendered irrelevant when today brings with it a new version of the software.

I've no doubt Prime was no good for PD at some point in time, but in comparing the latest beta version of Prime (ver27.9, not 27.7 which is the latest release version) to both the latest version and previous version of LinX, the latest version of Prime is superior for PD.

 

[sequoia464]

, the latest version of Prime is superior for PD.

Thanks, I'll check for the latest version. I havent updated in a while.

Just running an 8320 @ 4300 so I'm not really stressing it to much, at the same time though, this is my work machine so I do want it to be error free.

 

[Idontcare]

double-post, nvm

 

[Idontcare]

Thanks, I'll check for the latest version. I havent updated in a while.

Just running an 8320 @ 4300 so I'm not really stressing it to much, at the same time though, this is my work machine so I do want it to be error free.

I found for my 8350 @ 4300 the difference between being LinX stable and being Prime95 ver27.9 largeFFT stable was startling.

I had to increase Vcore by 0.05V to be prime95 stable verus what it took to be LinX stable. Prime95 temperatures were 10°C higher (71C vs 61C), and power consumption was 355W versus 312W with LinX.

 

[guskline]

IDC: Sorry, OCCT. I ran both OCCT and AMD Overdrive stability test for 2 hrs and 1 hr respectively on my 8350 rig OC'd to 4.6Ghz (21x 219fsb) without errors. I know that there was a big stink on another forum that PileDrivers, even at stock clocks, were failing prime95 and that it had to do with the software.

I'll try running the newest version of Prime95 on my 8350 and report the results. I have upped my vcore to 1.46 with my OC to assure stability. I read about 8350 OCs with stock voltage and always say yes but did they really run OCCT or AMD Overdrive stability test?

I guess "bragging rights" about booting into windows trumps stability testing. I opt to have a CPU with a decent OC that is stable no matter what I throw at it.

Power usage? That's another story. Intel is light years ahead in these higher end chips. Heat? Ivy bridge OC'd cranks up the heat. However, Bulldozer is a blast furnace and PileDriver is a bit better but still cranks up the heat.

Bottomline? If you have a decent OC that is stable, spend some $$ on a decent PSU AND a decent cooler.

 

[guskline]

I found for my 8350 @ 4300 the difference between being LinX stable and being Prime95 ver27.9 largeFFT stable was startling.

I had to increase Vcore by 0.05V to be prime95 stable verus what it took to be LinX stable. Prime95 temperatures were 10°C higher (71C vs 61C), and power consumption was 355W versus 312W with LinX.

Power consumption is in line with what I found. Heat? If you were using the stock 8350 cooler that appears correct. It simply runs out of gas. Too much heat and not enough cooling to dissipate it. I went to the Corsair H100 with 4 fans to address this. Almost makes $$$ sense to use a custom water cooling system but have never dabbled in that plus at 4.6 Ghz with temps at most in the mid 50s when running stress tests I'm about maxed out.

 

[guskline]

I mostly gave up trying to follow an extremely long thread at overclock.net and don't know if you might have seen it (vishera owners thread, 760+ pages), but there were discusions as to weather Prime95 is worth using on piledriver CPU's. Have you read anything on this?

I don't really remember now what the arguements were, both for and against Prime with PD, or if there was any eventual concensus on it's validity as a tool with PD.

I have just been using LinX and AMD's stabiity tester - if these are not rigorous enough it might be time to start using Prime again??

I've read and even posted on that forum. Some of the OCs are bordering on crazy. Moreover, you really need a custom water cooling system to safely run at extreme OCs (i.e. 5 Ghz).

I run OCCT and AMD Overdrive stability tester plus a 20X run of IBT. It has taken me much tweeking, a high end cooler, decent bump in vcore and other parameters to get my 8350 rig to run at 4.6Ghz 24/7/365. Have I bumped up the vcore to 1.5v and booted into Win 8 at 5Ghz? sure! Would I run all stress tests and keep it at that speed? NO. too much heat, too much power.

I'll use a car analogy. My wife and I were lucky enough to buy a used 07 Pontiac Solstice GXP 2 years ago (daughters all married and we wanted a fun 2 seater). The car has the 2 liter Direct injection 4 cylinder engine from GM that produces at the crank 260HP and 260ft-lbs of torque. Believe it or not, the most powerful engine per cubic inch ever produced by GM (look it up I was amazed). Well these engines can be "tuned" - even GM has a tune to up the HP to 290 and torque to 330. I got the bug and applied a tune from Trifecta. it was their stock tune, not the most powerful one.

I spent $80 to have a 3 run dyno down after the tune. AT THE WHEELS, not the crank it produced 281HP and 360ft-lbs torque! Plenty for me with a safe tune that I can drive all the time. I feel the same way about OCing. Crank it up but don't blow it up.:awe:

 

[Phynaz]

I had to increase Vcore by 0.05V to be prime95 stable verus what it took to be LinX stable. Prime95 temperatures were 10°C higher (71C vs 61C), and power consumption was 355W versus 312W with LinX.

You're still on the stock cooler, right?

 

[Idontcare]

You're still on the stock cooler, right?

Yeah, haven't changed anything yet. I'm paranoid that as soon as I "break the seal" and move away from stock config I will uncover yet another achilles heel in my testing regiment and my non-stock results will no longer be comparable to the original stock results.

So that is why I am spending what probably seems like an inordinate amount of time vetting my procedures while still stuck using the stock setup. I know once I drive this thing off the lot there is no going back and starting over again. So I want to do it right.

Of course I also have this nagging voice in my head that keeps saying "you've never done it right in the past, so why start now?" And I may just give in to that voice yet

 

[jvroig]

What's the max OC you've gotten so far with the stock cooler?

 

[guskline]

Yeah, haven't changed anything yet. I'm paranoid that as soon as I "break the seal" and move away from stock config I will uncover yet another achilles heel in my testing regiment and my non-stock results will no longer be comparable to the original stock results.

So that is why I am spending what probably seems like an inordinate amount of time vetting my procedures while still stuck using the stock setup. I know once I drive this thing off the lot there is no going back and starting over again. So I want to do it right.

Of course I also have this nagging voice in my head that keeps saying "you've never done it right in the past, so why start now?" And I may just give in to that voice yet

You make an excellent point. It's easy to see that once the 8350 climbs past @4.35-4.4 Ghz the heat rise is too much for the stock cooler to handle. You can see why the turbo only went to 4.2 Ghz!

 

[Idontcare]

What's the max OC you've gotten so far with the stock cooler?

Oh I can do 4.5GHz easy but it isn't LinX or Prime95 stable. But it will do most workloads at 4.5GHz on stock cooling without crashing.

When I apply the stability constraint that it must be stable in the face of Prime95 LargeFFT, the max stable OC for my 8350 is 4.3GHz on the stock cooler.

 

[bgt]

Prime95 test shows(1 hour on stock) how cool the CPU(FX8350) stays. Impressive. And all with aircooling. It shows also the temps are very well controlled on the die....its not jumping high very quickly when loading.
BTW.....a 3770K is on its way and I am very curious how it will do with load vs temps.

 

[Chrisoldinho]

Hello all,

New to the forums, and thought I would post my experiences overclocking an 8350, the key difference is what stress testing application I use as this greatly differs what overclock I am both capable of, and happy with. It is worth noting from the outset 4.8 seemed stable using AIDA (at a very respectable 1.46125) until I noticed during an encode using handbrake temps soared to 70 degrees, Prime and OCCT would require 1.5125v to achive 4.8 stable, but temps sky rocket at this, that said I must of had nearly 2 weeks usage stable before I noticed this, and experienced no crashes although perhaps the CPU was throttling?

I am using a Phanteks PH-TC14PE air cooler, with 3 140mm fans

Temperatures up to and including 4.6 are good in Prime95, and I am stable for 24 hours using 1.45v (27.9), temps hit a maximum of 57 on the core but typically sit around 54 which I like as it keeps the fan profile silent, jumping to 4.7 requires 1.49325v, and temps hit circa 62 on the core, and rarely dip below 58. Clearly 4.6 is my sweet spot.

For 4.6, I have adjusted a few other variables, firstly I found the same stability but lower temps (circa 5 degrees) by using a CPU/NB of 1.375, I also lowered the CPU VDDA down to 2.2 down from the default 2.5.

On my 990FX Sabertooth (R1) board, I have set CPU LLC at Ultra High, CPU/NB on high to counteract droop, and CPU current capacity & CPU/NB current capability at 130% with the intention of allowing the board to use 143A & stop overvolting.

Finally I have locked HT at 2600, CPU/NB at 2200 and DRAM at 1600 manually, disabled spread spectrum but left all power saving features active with the exception of CnQ which I have set to "disabled by CPU", although I may revert this back. I just wanted to ensure no throttling was taking place.

System power draw with monitors on standby under full load 362W (Prime95 blend).

 

[Greenlepricon]

Hello all,

New to the forums, and thought I would post my experiences overclocking an 8350, the key difference is what stress testing application I use as this greatly differs what overclock I am both capable of, and happy with. It is worth noting from the outset 4.8 seemed stable using AIDA (at a very respectable 1.46125) until I noticed during an encode using handbrake temps soared to 70 degrees, Prime and OCCT would require 1.5125v to achive 4.8 stable, but temps sky rocket at this, that said I must of had nearly 2 weeks usage stable before I noticed this, and experienced no crashes although perhaps the CPU was throttling?

I am using a Phanteks PH-TC14PE air cooler, with 3 140mm fans

Temperatures up to and including 4.6 are good in Prime95, and I am stable for 24 hours using 1.45v (27.9), temps hit a maximum of 57 on the core but typically sit around 54 which I like as it keeps the fan profile silent, jumping to 4.7 requires 1.49325v, and temps hit circa 62 on the core, and rarely dip below 58. Clearly 4.6 is my sweet spot.

For 4.6, I have adjusted a few other variables, firstly I found the same stability but lower temps (circa 5 degrees) by using a CPU/NB of 1.375, I also lowered the CPU VDDA down to 2.2 down from the default 2.5.

On my 990FX Sabertooth (R1) board, I have set CPU LLC at Ultra High, CPU/NB on high to counteract droop, and CPU current capacity & CPU/NB current capability at 130% with the intention of allowing the board to use 143A & stop overvolting.

Finally I have locked HT at 2600, CPU/NB at 2200 and DRAM at 1600 manually, disabled spread spectrum but left all power saving features active with the exception of CnQ which I have set to "disabled by CPU", although I may revert this back. I just wanted to ensure no throttling was taking place.

System power draw with monitors on standby under full load 362W (Prime95 blend).

Welcome to the forums and thanks for posting! Looks like you had some fun with your chip too. 4.6GHz or so does seem to be a very happy place for Vishera. Just curious but did you try it with the fan profiles at max? I keep mine low almost all the time too but if I really want to push my cpu then I'm willing to turn my pc into a jet engine

 

[guskline]

Chrisoldinho, your findings are consistent with what I find for the 8350. I keep it at 4.6 Ghz.

 

[Abwx]

Perhaps it s time to revive timely what appear retrospectively as one of the most fuddy thread ever wich has done great damage to AMD, not because those latter did actualy underspec their TDP ratings but because the OP was unaware of how a CPU voltage regulation loop work.

What caught my attention is that the probed voltage is exactly equal to the VID, wich is rarely the case, unless one remove the LLCC automatic setting and goes fully manual, in wich case the CPU can no more set the voltage to the optimal number since in this case the user is the one that decide of what is the optimal level.

By removing the automated regulation the OP, deliberatly or not, forced the CPU to eventualy work out of specs, in this case the CPU was overvolted from 1.24V up to a forced voltage of 1.377 wich is the value of the VID wich is forced as default value since the automation is removed.

With this trick the CPU was overvolted by a ratio 1.377/1.24 = 1.1105 leading to a ratio 1.233 more power then necessary, using the 125W official figure it s not difficult to compute that this inflated the power up to 154W, now pass thoses 154W through the MB VRMs efficency and the PSU efficency wich are about 90% each and you ll get 192W power variation at the main from idle to load, this is correlated by the OP measurement that showed a delta of 194W.

Hardware.fr review from 2012 with overclocking results, VID voltages and probed voltages of the FX8350 on an ASUS MB, like the OP, the first line is the defaukt setting :

http://www.hardware.fr/articles/880-5/overclocking-undervolting.html

Even if truth is now known i guess that the bad has already been done by what i consider as an infamous review, and i back it with numbers that say so.

 

[coercitiv]

This info might also come in handy:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Its official voltage at 4 GHz is 1.3375v and the motherboard supplies in reality 1.24v when the ASUS EPU energy economy mode is on because of the usual vDrop. For our tests we limited this vDrop by turning the EPU off and putting the CPU Load Line Calibration on High and then Extreme and CPU Current Capability at 130%. We also turned the HPC Mode on in the ASUS bios so as to cater for any drop in clock linked to excessive energy consumption.[/FONT]

 

[Phynaz]

Wow, coming to the defense of AMD with a two year old necro.

 

[Abwx]

This info might also come in handy:

They re did the test recently with exactly the same FX8350 sample than they used in 2012 to compare its voltages with the recently released FX8370E, and in the more recent MB Asus Sabertooth, probed voltage is slightly higher at 1.27V but nowhere near the 1.377 forced as default and stable value, results are below :

http://www.hardware.fr/focus/99/amd-fx-8370e-fx-8-coeurs-95-watts-test.html

We can see that at default setting, and with another MB, the VID is 1.3375V and that the regulation loop set it at 1.27V, besides the CPU is loaded with Prime 95 in thoses tests, wich is more stressfull than Linpack.

 

[Burpo]

Wow, coming to the defense of AMD with a two year old necro.

Really.. No wonder his 5000+ posts running around crapping on threads like some Caped Crusader for AMD..
So pas·sé..

 

[Abwx]

Wow, coming to the defense of AMD with a two year old necro.

You have problems with posts debunking what is ultimately viral marketing, be it deliberate or not.?.

Before being a necro it has served some purpose, that is, to spread falsehood and misinformation, how many people where influenced by this review thinking that the OP was competent in this matter.?

How many people used this caricature of review as a "prove" of AMD CPUs being allegedly power hungry.?

Besides, this necro was quoted recently by the very OP that opened it....

Really.. No wonder he has 5000+ posts running around like some Caped Crusader for AMD.. So pas·sé..

I m on point while you are thread crapping and attacking me personaly, what are your technical arguments that would negates my sayings.?.

None since all you re expressing is your hate of anything AMD related, as proved by your post...